Chapter 5 Reading Response

I thought the rules Perry Cook used to design interfaces was an interesting way to approach the design of new technologies. In particular, I resonated with 5.8 and 5.11. In general, when I have approached learning a new technology or tool to create art, I have found myself turned away by the super advanced tools (like starting with Final Cut Pro versus iMovie) and like to start at a more intuitive program. The common problem I find is that there are too many options and become easily overwhelmed and confused as to what the extra features do, why I need them, how to use them, etc. Therefore, I am curious as to how you can balance flexibility and technological novelty with user readability and understanding. I guess from our other discussions, you always have to think about the audience you are designing for, and often times, the principals for design need to be adapted for the audience’s level of interest. I actually don’t think even the majority of traditional instruments meet this design approach since you usually need someone to teach you how to use an instrument — I don’t think a piano or guitar is a particularly intuitive instrument without knowing some music theory or how to play chords (especially for a guitar). However, traditional instruments do sort of follow Principle 5.11 in that they can be used just for fun, or you can end up a concert violinist playing at Carnegie Hall, and that is reliant on how much the user can invest in the instrument.

I also wonder then, if a lot of computer music tools have a similar range of skill use as a traditional instrument. Are we going to see a rise in famous players of certain computer music tools? And if that doesn’t seem to be the trajectory the industry is headed, what design principles can we apply so “fame” can be achieved in a similar way? It again brings me back to DJing and how there’s actually been a rise in algorithmically generated DJing where musicians will code out how tracks transition and sound effects that are typically only controllable through the DJ hardware/software. While it’s not a completely novel instrument, it falls under principle 5.14 to me since musicians are taking the existing controllers (quite literally) and adding new algorithmic manipulations to their music! I’ve never experimented with it, but I’d be curious as to how different the outcomes for the music can be or if it’s just a different tool for musicians to mix music with that provides similar results. I linked an article about “live-coding” parties here :)